1012 réponses à ce sujet

[Brockololly]

tdawg7669 wrote...

BTW the raining fireball spell looks awesome.

It almost looked just like the fireball spell that the Architect can use in Awakening against the Mother.

[tmp7704]

In Exile wrote...

I should have used a stronger word. I mean, gamebreaking. Entirely gamebreaking.

Yeah, but would the different approach to animation, like the one i described, address that?

Mages aren't locked up because of the power of magic. They're locked up out of i) fear of demonic posession and ii) fear of what allegedly happened with Tevinter and the blight, and iii) bloodmagic. That's the reason for the tower.

All these factors tie directly to the power of magic, though -- the demonic posession alone isn't considered as grave as the prospect of posessed person that's capable of what a mage can do. Tevinter and the feats of its denizens were also based on the power of magic. Bloodmagic, again, is source of power/control that goes well beyond of what's possible for regular mortal.

It isn't the power difference between them and warriors so much as it is certain reality altering abilities of magic, at least lore-wise.

And you don't consider the ability of alter the reality itself to be a "power difference" enough between these warriors and the magic users?

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...

Yeah, but would the different approach to animation, like the one i described, address that?

Haha. I forgot to add that part of my answer.

Yes.

All these factors tie directly to the power of magic, though -- the demonic posession alone isn't considered as grave as the prospect of posessed person that's capable of what a mage can do. Tevinter and the feats of its denizens were also based on the power of magic. Bloodmagic, again, is source of power/control that goes well beyond of what's possible for regular mortal.

But it isn't fear of magic that led to this. It was the blight, and Andraste's crusade against Tevinter. Mages have (and do, with the chasind) live and lived quite freely without the control of the circle.

It wasn't the power of magic that led to the Circles; it was bloodmagic and the bli

And you don't consider the ability of alter the reality itself to be a "power difference" enough between these warriors and the magic users?

No. I meant alter reality as-in mind control. That's the issue with magic, at least lore wise. This is the fear.

Modifié par In Exile, 19 décembre 2010 - 05:18 .

[tmp7704]

In Exile wrote...

No. I meant alter reality as-in mind control. That's the issue with magic, at least lore wise. This is the fear.

Hmm i think flinging the fireballs along with the rest of potential mage's arsenal is partially the source of fear, too. But that's something Mr.Gaider would/could clear up one way or the other, i'm just guessing based on what the game provides.

[In Exile]

tmp7704 wrote...
Hmm i think flinging the fireballs along with the rest of potential mage's arsenal is partially the source of fear, too. But that's something Mr.Gaider would/could clear up one way or the other, i'm just guessing based on what the game provides.

When we talked about it on the old forums, it was the Blight that was firemost in the minds of Thedas, as that was the teaching of the Andrastrian chantry. Depending, demonic posession and blood magic were the next fears. The actual magic parts of magic were much lower on the list.

In fact, most of what we debated on the old DA:O forums centered around demoic posession. That was our m

[Lord_Kaza]

If I would be BW, I would be terribly worried about the game, after reading all these posts....

[Sylvius the Mad]

In Exile wrote...

What is the issue is you presupposing their standard, i.e. that failing to make it fun to watch for you means that it is not fun to watch.

My fun is the only fun of which I can be aware.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

That was never an objective. Fun to play, fun to look at while playing. Fun to watch implies you can just put down your mouse or controller and enjoy a sandwich, and my feelings on sandwich-play pretty much match my feelings on shuffling into combat.

Someone at BioWare kept saying that it needed to be fun to watch when the player would show it to his friends.

On "sandwich-play", let me just say that I loved the original Dungeon Siege.  I thought its combat was terrific for an action RPG.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

If you elect to control a single character, you will see that they go through a selection of moves when they attack. The moves flow into one another creating a visual flow for the way the character attacks. In testing, we found that if the pace of each hit was identical, it would create a sense of repetition, and disengagement in the people playing. "I hit, I hit, I hit, I hit, I hit, I hit..." and so on. Looking at how to break that up, we elected to create moves that took slightly longer to execute (via flourish, twirl or what have you), but that inflict higher than usual damage. Doing so creates more visual variety, gives the combat a sense of pacing that was absent in origins and generally give the characters more personality than just going "I swing my sword left. Now I swing my sword right."

If you do not like that personality, there's little I can do about it, and even less I would want to do about it. As with so many things, it's largely an aesthetic choice, and when you make an aesthetic choice there will always be people who do not match your opinion, which is why it is aesthetic, and not emperical. I'm prepared to live with a few complaints about twirl if it results in an experience that has tested better in terms of overall feel and pacing any day. To my mind, the important part is that we MADE a choice, backed it up with data and built a game that works well with that choice.

Does this mean that, if I decide to have a specific character make an attack on an opponent who is already within range, I won't know how long that attack will take?

That seems like a tactical problem.  This is the very reason I disliked the deathblows in DAO - sometimes a killing shot would take longer, thus impeding the ability of that character to move on to another target.  In DA2 it seems like we're routinely not going to know how long an attack will take, thus limiting our ability to plan ahead.

Unless these differences are very small.

[Wissenschaft]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

In Exile wrote...

What is the issue is you presupposing their standard, i.e. that failing to make it fun to watch for you means that it is not fun to watch.

My fun is the only fun of which I can be aware.

Then you are not fit to be a game designer. That job sort of requires you to understand more than just your own sense of fun. 

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

My fun is the only fun of which I can be aware.

In the sense of 'experience,' yes. In the sense of 'know about,' I disagree. If someone tells me they find roller coasters fun, I assume they're giving me accurate information, even though hurtling through loops at obscene speeds while completely out of control of the situation is quite unfun for me.

Even if no one tells me they enjoy roller coasters, that they exist and thousands of people pay money to ride them is evidence they are fun for someone.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Even if no one tells me they enjoy roller coasters, that they exist and thousands of people pay money to ride them is evidence they are fun for someone.

This I will grant you.

I have no such data for the viewing of RPG gameplay as an impartial spectator.

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Even if no one tells me they enjoy roller coasters, that they exist and thousands of people pay money to ride them is evidence they are fun for someone.

This I will grant you.

I have no such data for the viewing of RPG gameplay as an impartial spectator.

True. The best you can do for that is viewcount for youtube videos of people playing. It's not like Starcraft where people watch replays of the game with commentary.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Maria Caliban wrote...

It's not like Starcraft where people watch replays of the game with commentary.

People do that?  Really?

Wow.

[Rixxencaxx]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

It's quite rare that anyone is prepared to "go to the mat" over something they enjoy, but if you're angry/feeling betrayed/having a bad day/whatever, you'll keep repeating your point in the hope that maybe it will change, or at the very least that you'll be vindicated when whatever has you angry doesn't change, and sucks.

mmm it seems that a lot of game previewers had a bad day when wrote their article

the average previewers conlusions are "it seem a button masher or hack n's slash but we have faith cause is bioware".....

Modifié par Rixxencaxx, 19 décembre 2010 - 09:53 .

[Snoteye]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

People do that? Really?

As much as any other sport.

[Maria Caliban]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

It's not like Starcraft where people watch replays of the game with commentary.

People do that?  Really?

Wow.

Indeed. In South Korea, there are even televised competitions.

I've watched a few myself. They're interesting and unlike most sports, they don't take several hours of your time.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 19 décembre 2010 - 09:41 .

[Jonp382]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

It's not like Starcraft where people watch replays of the game with commentary.

People do that?  Really?

Wow.

Competitive games tend to attract players and spectators. Doesn't matter if it's 'athletic' or not. Quake, Counter-strike, Starcraft, etc. have had a following for over ten years now.

[Nerevar-as]

I´m also concerned how gameplay combat will fit wth cutscene combat (if there is some of it). Having a cutscene with a character totally failing a movement in gameplay is an automatic success is jarring. For example, the rogue´s teleport step.

I hope this is not like ME2, the character power between cutscenes and gameplay was really bad, especially with the biotics.

[adembroski11]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...

Piecake wrote...

I personally have a hard time reconciling dark, gritty, down-to-earth fantasy with killing hordes and hordes of enemies while being vastly outnumbered.

I believe that if we were -really- going to go gritty, we would have to fundamentally re-examine combat from every aspect. The first step would be to cut mages, or to drastically reduce them in effect. So long as we are working in a world where mages can throw fireballs (or at least more than one a week, or something very limiting), there will be SOME element of the world that's over the top.

I think Dragon Age II does a much better job of simply accepting that, and in response it brings parity to the classes. Rogues and warriors receive some degree of over-the-top as well, which I think makes for a stronger visual presentation, and a better feel, because all three classes are consistent.

The other step we could have taken would have been slapping mages with harsher and harsher realism, and I am quite certain that a number of people here would have loved that. I'm also quite certain that you could make an excellent game by doing exactly that, just as I firmly believe that you can make an excellent game by doing what we did.

Which is exactly what virtually every game does. 

Don't take this wrong, I'm thrilled with what I've seen from DAII and I'm looking forward too it, but I'm interested to know... why is the choice always made to go the God of War route rather than the LotR route? Well, LotR is probably more extreme than I am actually thinking of.

I'm not asking DA do that by any means. Dragon Age is a typical D&D-esque fantasy world, very much like Forgotten Realms or Dragonlance, so to reign magic in would detract from what's been established. I will, however, say that the visual effects on sustained spells are very distracting... I'm not fond of conversing with someone in a cut scene and have him pay absolutely no heed to the fact that I'm standing on a glowing red pentagram and appear to be being attacked by a swarm of glowing purple butterflies.

[DPB]

adembroski11 wrote...

I will, however, say that the visual effects on sustained spells are very distracting... I'm not fond of conversing with someone in a cut scene and have him pay absolutely no heed to the fact that I'm standing on a glowing red pentagram and appear to be being attacked by a swarm of glowing purple butterflies.

That's why they've disabled the effects in cutscenes in DA2.

[In Exile]

adembroski11 wrote...
Don't take this wrong, I'm thrilled with what I've seen from DAII and I'm looking forward too it, but I'm interested to know... why is the choice always made to go the God of War route rather than the LotR route? Well, LotR is probably more extreme than I am actually thinking of.

DA2 did go the LoTR route. The movie route, where Legolas is surfboarding on elephants, and Aragon and Glimli murder orcs by the tens or hundreds alone.

Modifié par In Exile, 19 décembre 2010 - 02:28 .

[Wulfram]

Mike Laidlaw wrote...
Rogues and warriors receive some degree of over-the-top as well, which I think makes for a stronger visual presentation, and a better feel, because all three classes are consistent.

Performing supernatural gymnastic routines in the middle of combat is rather more than "some degree of over-the-top"

[Nerevar-as]

In Exile wrote...

adembroski11 wrote...
Don't take this wrong, I'm thrilled with what I've seen from DAII and I'm looking forward too it, but I'm interested to know... why is the choice always made to go the God of War route rather than the LotR route? Well, LotR is probably more extreme than I am actually thinking of.

DA2 did go the LoTR route. The movie route, where Legolas is surfboarding on elephants, and Aragon and Glimli murder orcs by the tens or hundreds alone.

Legolas is justified as superior elven agility and balance (excepting the oliphant, he seemed spiderman there), but both Gimli and Aragorn use normal movements, nothing even close to what we see in DA2. DA2 is halfway to wuxia or a bad action flick from this decade. You can have over the top and still look good and coherent to the world (Arkahm Asylum, the Berserk comic), but BW thinks the more exagerated the better it´ll sell. While I don´t want the game to fail, it´s something I´d like to see proved wrong.